Susan Smith: a Case Study

1

Susan Smith: A Case Study

RUNNING HEAD: SUSAN SMITH

Susan Smith: A Case Study

Name

Title

Course

Instructor

Charges

Susan Leigh Vaughan Smith was born on September 26, 1971 in Union, South Carolina. On July 22nd, 1995, Smith was convicted for the murder of her two small sons. The victims were 3-year-old Michael Smith, and 14-month-old Alexander Smith. The method of killing was by setting the family car on neutral and letting it slide down a dock into a nearby lake, as the children were sitting in their car seats on the back seat of the vehicle. It was done at night, so the victims likely were able to feel the water inundating the car, while not being able to see what was going on in the dark. (Montaldo, 2018)

What is most shocking about the Susan Smith case is the series of events that occurred after the murders. She went on national television and, with her unsuspecting husband beside her, accused an imaginary young black man for carjacking her and taking her sons hostage. This news sent the country into outrage and started a national search for said man that lasted nearly nine days. Days later, Smith confessed to lying. She even admitted to staging the news the way that she did because she knew that the Union, South Carolina press would have believed a black man more capable of killing and stealing than a white woman. (Chuck, 2015)

Biological, Developmental and Environmental factors

Susan Smith was born in a family where three prevailing factors were ever-present: mental instability, suicidal tendencies, and co-dependent behaviors. Her father was a former firefighter who later became a mill worker. He committed suicide when Susan was 6 years-old, after obsessing over Susan’s mother supposed infidelities. His co-dependent behavior towards Susan’s mother led him to the suicide. Eventually, her mother re-married. This time, it was a to well-to-do man who moved Susan and her mother to a better neighborhood.

The death by suicide of Smith’s father occurs at the start of a vulnerable stage of development. Using Erikson’s theory, this would be thestage of “Latency,” which takes place from ages 6 to 12. At this point, children are working through the milestone of Inferiority versus Industry (Erikson, 1969). As such, Susan Smith would have been a first grader, beginning to recognize her role among the society of kids her age. (Reekers, 1996)

The suicide of her father would have been a life changing event that changed her outlook on life forever. Not only would she have mourned her father figure, but she would have learned the realities of suicide right at the onset of her psychosocial development. It will be seen that, throughout her life, the “suicide solution” was always an option in Susan Smith’s way of thinking. During her high school years, and later on during her time in prison, Susan Smith would speak of suicide as a natural alternative to her problems. Judging by the ease with which her father, and then Susan, treated suicide, chances are the tendencies are either inherited or learned socially. Regardless, the idea of suicide seems to be deeply ingrained in the family.

Behavioral Factors

After the death of her father, Susan Smith’s mother, Lisa Vaughan, re-married a wealthy main who had political standing. He was able to remove Susan from a squalid home and got the family into an upper-middle class lifestyle. While the financial factor improved for Susan, her mental instability began to show. Growing up, she had a tendency to be reactive, jumping from relationship to relationship. She never had formal friends of the same gender and seemed to devote her time to whoever her partner was at the time. As such, her only constant companion was her husband, their children, and whatever other chaotic relationship she was fostering on the side.

The Mother Factor

According to the psychiatrist appointed by the State during her trial, Susan was in constant competition with her mother over the attentions of her stepfather. She also allegedly had sex with her stepfather consensually and was in the habit of engaging in sexual relations with co-workers in the different jobs she had as she grew older. Her mother was no companion or role model. Even after Susan’s crime and time in prison, Lisa Vaugh wrote a book about her daughter, went on national TV, and attempted to vaguely explain what her daughter did. She took the side of her daughter’s potential mental illness, but her nonchalant attitude toward her daughter’s sexual activity with her husband left many wondering what relationship Susan Smith had with her mother. (Chuck, 2015)

Social and environmental factors

According to Cahill (2016) the society of Union, South Carolina is one where people tend to marry and have children straight out of high school. The expected results include financial tension and maturity issues during the first years of the marriage. Susan and David Smith were not the exception. Everything, from financial struggles, to infidelity, plagued the relationship from the very start. Their relationship was tumultuous and there were little to no social systems in place to help them. At age 23, Susan Smith had already experienced a tragic childhood, a chaotic upbringing, a turbulent marriage, and her only outlet was a new job she found at Conso Corporation.

Pivotal Factor?

Once at Conso, according to Reekers (1996), Smith experienced a degree of success never experienced before. She was working directly with successful company clients, sharing her spare time with professionals, and recognized in her small town as an employee of one of the town’s few corporations. Perhaps the event that set off the chain of events was that Susan had caught the eye of the company’s CEO’s son, Tom Findlay. A graduate of Auburn University who worked as graphic director for the company Susan was working for, he was considered an eligible bachelor in the city. Wealthy, educated, and relatively good looking, Findlay dated Smith on and off during her many separations from her husband. (Reekers, 1996)

During this time, Smith experienced success and was perhaps hoping for her life to change for good. The addition of having Tom Findlay’s attention may have brought her a much- needed boost of self-esteem after a life of consistent disappointment. However, a life of disappointment is not overwritten by just one good event. Susan Smith’s circumstances may have slightly changed, but she could not change herself. (Reeker, 1996)

Eventually, according to Findlay, Smith became clingy, emotional and quite co-dependent. This suffocated him, along with the fact that she had children. He sent Smith a “Dear John” type of letter where he broke off their relationship for good, citing that it is impossible for them to be together because of the children, and also because Smith had displayed grossly sexual behaviors during a hot tub party involving the husband of a co-worker. According to the prosecution, this letter was aggravated Smith’s already unstable behavior. In the eyes of her defense, this letter sent Smith her into a deep state of depression that made her lose touch with reality. (Montaldo, 2018)

Theories of Crime

The Defense took into consideration several mitigating factors in order to save Susan Smith from getting the death penalty. Aside from the fact that she had no previous criminal record, or that she had never before posed a danger to society, her lawyers added her past history as a causative factor for her mental state. Her father’s suicide, her stepfather’s sexual abuse, a careless mother, Union City’s lack of opportunities, a bad marriage, young motherhood, and a tendency for dependent behavior were cited as the factors that rendered her capable of committing such a heinous act. She was diagnosed with depression and dependent personality disorder. In the eyes of the defense, Susan Smith had finally found solace from a chaotic life thanks to Tom Findlay, and now that he decided to end the relationship, all her chaos came back all at once. (Chuck, 2015)

Theory of Enmeshment

The psychiatrist assigned to the case explained that, in cases of infanticide, mothers are usually young women who have become enmeshed, or nearly blended into the personality of their children. As such, their view is that their children are extensions of themselves, or parts of who they are. Therefore, in his theory, Susan Smith was punishing a part of her by drowning her children. She did not view them as her children, but as a cherished part of her which needed to go. (Reekers, 1996)

Clearly, the Prosecution actively attacked this posture. Their view was simple: Susan Smith drowned her children out of spite after Tom Findlay said that he did not want children. Moreover, Prosecution said she concocted the black man’s story to garnish the sympathy of Tom Findlay and play herself as a victim. All of this is part of a narcissistic attempt to gain back Tom Findlay. (Montaldo, 2018)

Narcissism

Prosecution agreed with the argument that Susan Smith did have a mental condition. Except, it was not enmeshment, or co-dependence, or depression. She was a plain narcissist. Her narcissism was evidenced with different witnesses who insisted that, all throughout her life, Susan Smith had been an attention seeker that manipulated people by causing undue drama. She would fight with friends, with her husband, with her mother, and with anyone who would give her either positive or negative attention. (Reekers, 1996)

Court Verdict

The death penalty trial of Susan Smith ended up with a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree with especially aggravating and malicious circumstances. However, after nearly 3 hours deliberating, the jury could not agree to unanimously decide in favor of the death penalty. Instead, they gave Susan Smith a minimum of 30 years in prison. In the eyes of those who do not believe in the death penalty, this may seem like an appropriate punishment, especially, during a time when the electric chair was still an option in South Carolina. However, time will eventually show that, perhaps, the prosecution was correct in declaring Susan Smith a narcissist. Her prison record says it all. (South Carolina Department of Corrections, 2018)

Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll for Susan Smith Behind Bars

As early as 4 years after entering prison, Susan Smith was already looking into ways to gain male attention. She entered a pen-pal program, WriteAPrisoner.com, for which she opened a profile page complete with a semi-seductive pose to attract attention (Cahill, 2016) In the 20 plus years that she has been incarcerated, Susan Smith has lost privileges over 15 times due to

• Possession of marihuana and other restricted substances
• Attempt to commit suicide (hurting herself)
• Contraband
• Stealing from commissary
• Having sex with 2 different guards, who lost their jobs

Susan Smith was found out having sex with guards after testing positive for a sexually-transmitted disease. She has been transferred two a different facility due to her misbehavior, and one of her punishments is not having contact with family. Due to her many infractions, Smith has lost contact with most people of her family but continues to have “prison fans” who send her money and lavish her with attention via letters and donations. (Cahill, 2016)

For these reasons, it is arguable that Susan Smith deserved zero mercy. Maybe the prosecution could have used better witnesses who could provide a deep look into the criminal tendencies of someone who clearly is unstable socially and psychologically. The important thing to remember is that, regardless of personality issues, Susan Smith knew right from wrong. She knew she killed her children. She knew she accused a black man unfairly. She knew she lied. She did not care. The good people of Union, South Carolina, in trying to preserve Christianity, has allowed a monster to continue to live.

References

Cahill, H. (2016)"Susan Smith: 20 years later, case still a shocker".The State.

Retrievedfrom

Chuck, E. (2016) (2015)."Susan Smith, Mother Who Killed Kids: ‘Something Went Very

Wrong That Night’", NBC News.

Retrieved from who-killed-kids-something-went-very-wrong-n397051

Erikson, E. Indentity (1969) Youth and Crisis New York: W.W. Norton

Montaldo, C. (2018) Profile of Child Killer Susan Smith Thought Co Online

Retrieved from

Reekers, C. (1996) Susan Smith: Victim Or Murderer. New York: Glenbridge Publishing Ltd.

South Carolina Department of Corrections: Susan Smith Profile

Retrieved from public/inmateDetails.do?id=%2000221487